U.S.Read's Conspiracy Theories?

August 25, 2004

by
Victor Trombettas

The following was submitted by me to
the Editor of The Wave––a Rockaway, NY newspaper (http://www.rockawave.com) which
has published U.S.Read's Flight 587 articles.
Dear Editor:

I'd like to respond to a letter by Wave reader David Cohen, which
appeared in your August 20th edition.

In his letter, Mr. Cohen accuses me of putting out "conspiracy
theories" related to the crash of Flight 587 (FL587). It's one thing to
accuse me of putting out one conspiracy theory, but Mr. Cohen goes
further and says I've put out more than one ("theories"). I'd
like to set the record straight.

I challenge Mr. Cohen to point out where in our summary and our
multi-part report (on usread.com) we have alleged a cover-up of the
cause of the crash of FL587. He won't be able to . . . because it
is not there.

Howard Schwach (The Wave's Editor) speculated that a government
cover-up might be at work, but I did not. I have no proof there
is a cover-up. Among some of our findings, we have uncovered
evidence the NTSB does not know about much of the debris found in the
Rockaways. All we’ve done is highlight these disturbing
facts. I also do not attempt to belittle or defame the work of
many intelligent, hardworking individuals at the NTSB. But as we
have heard before, the "road to hell is paved with good intentions" and
as we've also learned from recent history––even when a CIA Director
tells the President something is a "slam dunk", it could in fact be an
"air ball". If the CIA, with all it's good, hardworking people,
can get something so terribly
wrong, isn't it possible the NTSB could err? That is all I am
alleging. That they have erred.

Mr. Cohen suggests I am one person challenging the NTSB. That is
also not true. There are dozens of aviation experts who have
assisted me in my work. At the Witness Meeting sponsored by The
Wave in July 2002, at least four experts came to the meeting––experts
who support U.S.Read's analysis of the NTSB investigation. No
less than two former NTSB Investigators support our work at U.S.Read,
and one will be interviewed with me on radio this week.

Mr. Cohen suggested we wait for the NTSB's final report. The NTSB
has already reached many conclusions about what did and did not happen,
and they have released scores of factual reports. Our
"preliminary" report has analyzed and commented on what they have
already made public. I believe that in this country we all love
and cherish, the People benefit from such analysis and debate.

Anyone deeply familiar with the NTSB's information releases to date,
and familiar with our work, will tell you that we have raised some very
good points.

Lastly, our work has uncovered evidence the NTSB overlooked.
Critical evidence, such as the Air Traffic Control communications by
the pilot himself and what those transmissions tell us about the
condition of the aircraft. This evidence, and all our findings,
support the counter-thesis that the tail departing the aircraft was not
the cause of the crash, and the tail in fact departed later in the
crash sequence. Match all this up with no less than 39 witness
accounts of strange goings-on (loud noises, explosion, fire, smoke)
before the tail fell off––and it’s very easy to conclude something is
very wrong.